RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Optimal postoperative pain therapy for patients undergoing minimally invasive surgery remains controversial. The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the efficacy and safety of the novel laparoscopic-guided transversus abdominis plane block (L-TAP) with other analgesic alternatives in adults undergoing minimally invasive surgery. STUDY DESIGN: A systematic literature search of several databases was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines through March 9, 2020, to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting on L-TAP. Primary outcomes were pain scores at rest and movement at 24 hours postoperatively. Secondary outcomes included postoperative pain scores at 0 to 4 and 48 hours, opioid consumption, hospital stay, functional recovery, patient satisfaction, and adverse events. RESULTS: Nineteen RCTs with 1,983 patients were included. All trials compared L-TAP with ultrasound-guided transversus abdominis plane block (US-TAP), local infiltration analgesia (LIA), or inactive control; none controlled for epidural analgesia. Methodologic quality of these RCTs ranged from moderate to high. L-TAP provided comparable pain control compared with US-TAP, and better early pain control compared with LIA. Recovery parameters, 24-hour opioid consumption, and postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) were comparable between L-TAP and US-TAP. Meanwhile, 24-hour opioid consumption, PONV incidence, hospital stay, and patient satisfaction favored L-TAP compared with LIA. None of the studies reported adverse events related to the L-TAP procedure. CONCLUSIONS: L-TAP is safe, and superior to LIA with respect to early pain control, opioid consumption, and patient satisfaction in adults undergoing minimally invasive surgery. Given its equivalence to US-TAP, L-TAP can be used as a safer and pragmatic alternative to epidural analgesia in this patient population.
